Skip to main content

About your Search

English 26
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
of savings from spending on health care and revenues from closing loopholes, we consult the deficit issue without sacrificing our investments in things like education that are going to help us grow. it turns out the american people agree with me. they listened to an entire year's debate over this issue, and they made a clear decision about the approach they prefer. they do not think it is fair to ask a senior to pay more for his or her health care or a scientist to shut down like that saving research so that a multi millionaire investor can take less in tax rates then a second trip -- and a secretary. they do not think it is smart to protect and as corporate loopholes and tax breaks for the wealthiest americans rather than rebuild roads and schools or help manufacturers bring jobs back to america. they want us to get our books in order in a balanced way where everyone pulls their weight, everyone does their part. that is what i want as well. that is what i have proposed. we can get it done, but we're going to have to make sure people are looking at this irresponsible way, rather than just
that deal with the deficit and also have a vision and the stability in what is going to happen in terms of the voting of economic growth. estimate what the peak to the cut a piece of that. the spending on health not necessarily the biggest cost of the deficit right now but if you look at 20 years, for 30 years it is the alligator that is going to swallow everything. i was on a panel last week and there was a lively argument around should we raise the age for medicare, should we try to change the system and have a fee for service, has the obama administration done a lot to lower the cost of health care going forward so we don't need to do much more? what do you think is in practical terms what needs to be done on health care if you poll people they say we all want to cut medicare celerity want to go dealing with that piece of the puzzle? >> that reminds me when i was in graduate school i went to study foreign policy and was right around the time they balanced the budget and i thought my gosh what am i going to do? so i realized the long-term problems were still there and i had to make a
the deficit. so you have to open the door to private investment to do this job of rebuilding the power platform in the united states. >> host: and the technology aspect of that is? >> guest: technology aspect is manifold. and price performance improves every 18-24 mocks. in the last year we have gotten into the innovation cycle in batteries so by the end of 2020 electric vehicles will actually be price competitive with grass-driven cars. the problem with these things is that we can't wait. we can't wait because of the environmental effects and we can't wait because we need the economy to grow quickly right now. so the book lays out a whole bunch of different ideas for bringing private investment much more quickly into the job of rebuilding the power grid. >> host: on this show, a series on the international power plant, and he doesn't necessarily agree that the internet is completely green or is terribly green. what is your thought? >> guest: he is right about that. people say that data centers in the united states account for 2% of all electricity consumption. if it isn't exactly that
in that regard, and they haven't experience environmental problems. and with new york's budget deficit, it seems obvious that hydrofracking is the way to go. and, of course, governor cuomo is free to set whatever regulations he wants about that to ensure the safety of quality and other things that residents are concerned about. i would say that the project should proceed. it's brought benefit to other states. there's no reason that new york should be left behind. >> okay. right in front. wait for the mic a fun. >> you get very good examples of unsuccessful creations of new green jobs. had also looked at elimination of existing jobs like really good cost-benefit analysis done for regulations? >> the cost-benefit analysis for mercury was a travesty. if you look at the cost-benefit analysis carefully, all the benefits from reducing mercury came from getting rid of particulates and particulates were not the focus of that particular regulation. and what was interesting is the benefits focus on additional days of school. in other words, a few days of schools miss, two days of work missed because of lo
would be able to reduce the deficit by $150 billion. not a bad idea. and then if you could do all this and would only cost the average driver less than $1 per week per car, would that be a reasonable burden to impose? so i'm floating the idea. we are beginning discussions with senator mark warner of virginia. he was part of the gang of six, gang of eight. we are encouraged by what we're hearing from him. chairman bill shuster in the house came to our meeting in pittsburgh in november, and he said, listen, folks, we know that the central question congress will have to address next year is revenue. we are open to ideas. no guarantee that they can pass anything. but bill shuster is open to any and all ideas. so what i'm asking you to do is to join us in the battle that lies ahead this next couple of years and demand that congress provide long-term funding for transportation. you know, the big issue that every member of congress is concerned about is with deficits, long-term fiscal viability of the country and cutting spending and raising revenue, that combination is what people seem
reduced the federal deficit even by a dollar. we are not going to get out of this overnight. this would allow us to keep reducing the deficits. we have a shared value in eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. we are intent on that. host: how much of the budget does waste, fraud, and abuse make up? guest: i could go back to virginia beach, virginia, and we could identify waste every day. we will never eliminate it entirely. we can do a better job. it will take reforms. we are living longer and we have fewer people paying in. i want to protect those who are hurting the most, like art, who called in earlier. host: lester is a republican. caller: good morning. disability, 63 years old. my wife still works. $45,000 a less taw less than year. somehow someone is going to have to do something about this. guest: i agree completely. i believe it is immoral for one generation to pass on debt that dims their future. those who have served our country -- i am mindful of the price paid by our goldstar families. we're failing the young people. i am with you. i was over it. i believe when americans are gi
a conversation about how to redust our deficit let's have that. we've been having that nor the last two years. we just had an entire campaign about it. by the way the american people agreed with me that we should reduce our deficits in a balanced way that takes into account the need for us to grow this economy. martha: bob beckel is former democratic campaign manager and cohost of the five. mary katherine ham is editor at large and fox news contributor. why do you think it was so testy yesterday? >> obama's best form is not necessarily a press conference which is why he does than do many of them. i which he was testy for one real reason. the republicans trying to take the full faith and crucify the united states currency and putting it at fist being. i'd invoke the 14th amendment, we'd problem below know that if we spent more time with the republicans wasting time on the floor of the house. i thought he ought to raise it and to hell with congress. martha: we talked to stewart varney and kirsten said in that sound byte, this isn't about default, people don't think we aren't going to pay the debt o
as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. for decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. to continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals. you and i, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation? we must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. and let there be no misunderstanding -- we are going to begin to act, beginning today. [applause] the economic ills we suffer have come upon us over several decades. they will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away. they will go away because we as americans have the capacity now, as we've had in the past, to do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom. in this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. [applause] from t
the debt ceiling. this is the question we posed. is reduce the federal deficit a worthy goal? this is interesting you may recall white house press secretary made news by stating that deficit reduction is, quote not a worthy goal onto itself. 77% of voters disagree with them and that includes large majorities of republicans, independents and democrats. what is your take on this? >> again i don't want to be a downer here, the question is what urgency to do they place on that. we had an election two months ago where there were two candidates, one was more focused on cutting the deficit and reducing our long term debt and one didn't think it was a big concern. the one who didn't think it was a big concern won the election. yes, voters seem to say that is an issue they agree with, but when it came to election day two months ago that certainly wasn't one of the top issues they voted on because they voted for the candidate who wasn't embody go it. >> heather: through his actions, as well. that leads to this, how f or if it should be raised? should the debt limit be raised again, 23%
in the late 1980's when we didn't have to talk about how to pay for disaster assistance because the deficit was only $3 trillion. but we've so badly mismanaged our money after that, by the time we got to hurricane katrina in 2005, that we actually did start talking about offsetting and paying for disaster relief and paid for and offset about 40% of it. but we didn't learn. we didn't learn from those mistakes and we've continued to mismanage our money and to run up our deficit to such a point now where we're at $16 trillion today and it's incumbent upon us to have the discussion about whether or not we have the money to do this. and whether or not it's important enough to us to pay for it. i wish very much that we weren't here today. i wish very much that we could pass this and easily borrow the money, without any questions whatsoever. but we've wasted that opportunity. we've mismanaged our own finances to the point where we are now no longer capable of taking care of our own. think about that for a second. in the united states of america we do not have enough money to take care of our own c
important thing he could do is tax reform and deficit control. if he could put those two things together, that'd be bigger than health care. >> steve: you know what? if he were to work with the republicans talking reform-- >> i think that's a lock for next year. >> steve: well, he wants to do something about it. some republicans want to do something about it, remember last time with health care, the republicans had a bunch of ideas and the democrats shut them out completely. maybe this time bipartisan. >> brian: that's not the harry reid i know. >> alisyn: let's get to other stories in the headlines, late last noos night, two drones strikes, at least three of the bodies were burned beyond recognition. the death toll could rise in the hostage crisis at a gas plant in algeria. many were killed including one american. two americans are still missing and the crisis ended yesterday when the algerian army attacked the plant killing two militants. president obama said this is attack is another reminder of the threat posed by al-qaeda and other violent extremist groups in north africa. and the p
to prioritize the government's bills. what's wrong with that idea? guest: we have had some deficit reduction. as the president laid out a couple days ago, we have had over $2 trillion. we had 1.5 trillion that came from previous actions. and then we added just a few days ago some further deficit reductions through some increased taxes on the very wealthy of this country. so we have already begun to undertake deficit reduction. to use that as a reason to use the debt ceiling as a weapon is really playing with fire. they say pay some bills and not pay others. we have never tried that before. host: is it feasible? guest: i don't think so. which bills? social security? veterans? people out fighting for this country? which bills do you pay? we never tried that. i think the president put it so well. this is not a deadbeat nation really, and i think common sense is likely to prevail within the republican ranks. i know, if i might say so, if not firsthand, secondhand, much of the leadership within the house republican caucus, not all of it, i think some realizes the potential consequences. host: if
this. yes, it may run up the immediate deficit, but once again, for every dollar that we invest in those levees we not only save lives and property, but we put people to work and we get the economic engine going. further up in my district, again, along the sacramento and the rivers, i have a project that's 44 miles of levee that clearly will fail. it has failed four times in the last 60 years. lives have been lost. one of the most catastrophic failures of a levee happened in this stretch of river. we need to rebuild that. the federal government's role in these construction projects of these levees has gone back to the very beginning of this nation and it is congress' task to allocate the money to decide the projects that are going to be built. but unfortunately we tied ourselves in knots here with certain rules that have been put in by our republican colleagues that prevent us from taking the necessary action to protect our communities. we're not talking about, you know, willy nily unnecessary projects. we're talking about saving -- nilly unnecessary projects. we're talking abou
our debt to g.d.p., our deficit to g.d.p. down around 3%, which is the basis of all economists left, right and center all agree on the areas we can begin to grow as a country. and as my grandfather used to say with grace of god and goodwill of the neighbors, cooler heads will prevail now between now and the time we deal with the debt ceiling and we may meet the goal which we set out to do, which is to have roughly a $4 trillion cut over 10 years in the long-term deficit and to put us on that path. but i didn't come here to talk about any of those important subjects today, because as important as they all are today we have a more urgent and immediate call and that is how to deal with the epidemic of gun violence in america. you all know the statistics better than anyone so i'm not going to repeat them. on that score, i owe an incredible debt of gratitude to you at the head table and those of you in the room. i know we don't have unanimity in this ballroom nor do we in any ballroom, but we all acknowledge that we have to do something. we have to act. and i hope we all agree, there is
the american economy. >> steve: here is somebody who dealt with enormous deficits firsthand, the former governor of the golden state of california, arnold schwarzenegger. good morning to you. >> good morning. nice to be here again. >> brian: he sends a warning to the republicans should they back off or take on the president? >> first of all, i think i find it interesting that when you want to have more money, if you go to any financial institution, they say look, i can't pay my bills, i need more money. they want to see their payment plan. how are you going to live responsible from here on? then you can get more money. so i don't understand that why this should not be a part of the discussion because it ought to be. i think america should not just blindly go in there and keep spending money that we don't have. every single day we're spending more and more money. every year it's like $1.3 trillion more than we have and then it gets added to the debt and that's why this short period of time we have seen the debt go up. >> steve: we have a live picture of the debt now. all right, governor.
remains committed to further reducing the deficit in a balanced way. so that is the response from the white house after the gop at its retreat in virginia came out with the possibility that perhaps we could extend the debt limit for another three months but the senate has to pass a budget, so the republicans which it has not done in four years. so. tracy: no surprise from the white us house. ashley: says no. tracy: okay, then. how about this. hank paulson says he hates the debt limit. you remember the former treasury secretary, the guy who said i need $700 billion right now? no wonder he hates it. ashley: don't we all. tracy: he has given a rare interview. we have details on that next. ashley: first a look at today's winners and losers. the dow just above the water mark. take a look. we'll be right back. ♪ chances are you've become, a better driver over the years. and one company thinks your auto insurance rates should get better too. presenting the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford. i'm a good driver. have been for years. it just makes sense that better, more experi
veer -- inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put at a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to dig out of that. it is very difficult for organizations, especially in a crisis response, to think about just releasing the information before it's asked for and remove that deficit. i've been involved in several situations where the information was available and the information was understandable and probably mitigated some of the concerns, but because of the way the companies in the government work, it was difficult to make that transparent and then catching up with that with the american public is really, really difficult. nancy and marcia, we had talked about this with jay a lot. one of the problems we have in mental anguishing impacts -- measuring the impacts of the spill in the gulf is the lack of the background of the presence of hydrocarbons as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. in the context of moving beyond the direct aims of the research that's going to be conducted with the bp money, what do you think the lar
and deficit spending. those are -- >> a balanced way. i'm sure he'll use that language as well. >> a balanced way. opposing goals, but he intends to do them both. >> lynn, do you think we'll hear any talk of energy or climate change at all in the speech tomorrow? >> i do. i think climate change will be an added starter when we look at agenda goals, and i don't know if we had this discussion two months ago, even if curbing gun violence would have been something we would have thought would come up tomorrow. >> yeah. >> but i think that it is -- it is just something that the obama administration did not put a super emphasis on in the last four years and will be something that we'll hear about, in addition to the things that bill talked about. but i think somehow that obama will try to still cast himself as somebody who can try to bring more calm voice to civic discourse. i don't see how it could happen right away, because it didn't happen in the last four years. not sure how he can figure out how to navigate is this time. >> let's listen to some of the other promises made in the president's last
. the problem is if you'd inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put out a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to get out of that, and it is difficult for or organizations to think about releasing the information before it is out for. -- asked for. i have been involved in several situations where the information was available and understandable. it mitigated some concerns. it was difficult to make that transparent, and catching up with that is really difficult. one reason for the impact was the lack of information as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. as a context for moving beyond the research done, what do you think the larger research agenda ought to be about? >> the hydrocarbons in the continental shelf and inland areas are pretty well known. it is the deep sea we did not have information for. i think the deep sea ecosystem is an area we need to emphasize, and some of the longer living organisms such as marine mammals. one of the issues is the effect of multiple stressors. we have some smart jury is that were heavily oiled, and s
to new gun laws. >> tomorrow, former senators conrad and grade lead a discussion on deficit issues. we will be live starting at 8:30 a.m. eastern on c-span to. and at 1:00 p.m. eastern, chamber of commerce president thomas downey year -- thomas donahue called for immigration legislation. we will be live from the national press club also on c- span to. -- c-span 2. >> he talked about the dream he had, he talked about for years, the american dream. it had been his dream. and he was in detroit a few months before. he talked about -- i have a dream that america will someday realize its principals in the declaration of independence. so i think he is just inspired by that moment. >> sunday, claiborne carson recalls his journey as a civil- rights activist, participating on the 1963 march on washington. it is part of three days of the tv this weekend, monday featuring authors and books on the inauguration. >> president obama officially launched his effort to reduce gun violence wednesday, calling for action in congress and signing 23 executive orders to deal with the issue. speaking before an
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)